Summary#
S-10715, called “Raylee’s law,” is an introduced bill that would amend New York’s Education Law §3205. Its stated goal is to prohibit school districts from authorizing home instruction for some currently enrolled public school students when a parent or instructor is under investigation or has certain convictions; it is not law.
- A district could not authorize home instruction for a currently enrolled student if either custodial parent or a person instructing the child is the subject of a pending child abuse or neglect investigation.
- A district also could not authorize it if either custodial parent or a person instructing the child has ever been convicted of domestic violence, child abuse, or neglect.
- Every school district’s board of education would have to create and put in place a policy to ensure the superintendent is contacted when school staff report suspected child abuse or neglect.
- If the superintendent determines an investigation has started, the superintendent must ask the state Office of Children and Family Services (OCFS) to confirm the case status. OCFS must respond within 48 hours of receiving the request.
What it means for you#
- Students and families: The bill would restrict a district’s ability to authorize home instruction for a currently enrolled public school student in the listed circumstances. It does not set out what alternatives would be available.
- School districts: Each board of education would have to establish the reporting policy. Superintendents would have to request case-status confirmation from OCFS after determining that an investigation has started.
- School staff: The required policy must cover reports of suspected abuse or neglect made by teachers or other school personnel. The bill does not itself set out a reporting process for staff.
- OCFS: The agency would have to confirm case status within 48 hours after receiving a superintendent’s request.
- The bill does not ban home instruction generally. It applies to authorization for a currently enrolled public school student in the specified circumstances.
- The bill is at the introduced stage and has been referred to the Senate Rules Committee. It would not change the law unless enacted.
Money#
No publicly available information.
- The bill assigns duties to school boards, superintendents, and OCFS, but gives no cost estimate or staffing figure.
- The supplied material does not state whether these duties would require new spending.
What is unclear#
- The supplied material does not include the current text of Education Law §3205. The existing authorization process and how this bill would change it could not be verified.
- The bill does not define “pending” investigation, “person instructing the child,” or “domestic violence.”
- It does not explain how a district would establish that a conviction or pending investigation exists, or how long a restriction would apply.
- It does not say whether or how an existing home-instruction authorization would be affected.
- It does not set out review, appeal, or exception procedures.
Case for#
- The bill appears intended to keep a student’s school district involved when school personnel report suspected abuse or neglect and a related investigation may be underway.
- Requiring the superintendent to check case status with OCFS could give districts confirmation of whether an investigation has started.
- A possible argument for the restriction is that it avoids authorizing home instruction in the specified circumstances while concerns involving a parent or instructor are unresolved.
Case against#
- The restriction applies when an investigation is pending, not only after abuse or neglect has been established.
- The bill bars authorization based on a conviction “ever,” with no time limit or stated exception based on the conviction’s circumstances.
- The bill does not explain how districts should verify cases or convictions, or how families can challenge a decision.
- The required duties may need staff time or other resources, but the bill provides no funding or cost estimate.